The editorial board of The New York Post took aim at tech billionaire Elon Musk on Sunday, accusing him of overstepping his bounds by supporting the impeachment of a federal judge who had temporarily blocked deportations under the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act. The editorial criticized Musk’s involvement in the case, saying that his comments regarding the impeachment were inappropriate and outside his expertise.
The piece in The New York Post stated that Musk was “way out of his lane” for endorsing a movement to remove Judge James Boasberg from his position. Boasberg had issued a temporary hold on deportation flights for illegal migrants who were suspected members of criminal gangs, such as Tren de Aragua and MS-13.
While the Post editorial board expressed support for the general idea of tough deportation measures, they were critical of Musk’s stance on the matter.
“We like the idea of the flights: The brutes of Tren de Aragua and MS-13 have had it too easy for far too long, and current efforts to get tough are a necessary correction to Biden-era denial,” the editorial board wrote. However, they were critical of Musk’s support for Rep. Brandon Gill’s (R-Texas) plan to impeach Boasberg over his decision to temporarily halt deportations.
Rep. Gill had announced his intention on the social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, that he would be filing Articles of Impeachment against Judge Boasberg. Gill’s statement came after Boasberg issued a 14-day suspension of deportation orders for individuals eligible for removal under President Trump’s executive order invoking the Alien Enemies Act.
Musk responded to this announcement with a brief but pointed endorsement, calling it “necessary” in his own post on Sunday.
The controversy stems from a series of deportation flights ordered by the Trump administration as part of an effort to target gang members from criminal organizations like Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang, under the Alien Enemies Act. The law allows the federal government to deport individuals suspected of being involved in hostile foreign activities, and the Trump administration applied it to illegal immigrants with gang affiliations.
However, concerns arose when the scope of the deportation orders raised the possibility that individuals with no ties to these gangs could be deported, as the process barred individuals from having hearings before being removed from the country.
Judge Boasberg’s ruling temporarily halted these deportations, citing concerns about due process for individuals who were not gang members. This decision prompted Republican lawmakers, including Rep. Gill, to call for his impeachment, arguing that his order stood in the way of efforts to protect American citizens from the dangers posed by criminal gangs.
Musk, in turn, supported Gill’s position, tweeting “necessary” in response to Gill’s announcement.
The editorial board of The New York Post was critical of Musk’s actions, arguing that the tech mogul’s tweet supporting the impeachment was misguided. “The case seems destined to go all the way to the Supreme Court.
Can the feds simply declare anyone a TdA (Tren de Aragua) member before putting them on a plane off to an El Salvadoran prison?” the editorial board asked, questioning the legal implications of the case.
The board also pointed out that it was “silly” for Musk to endorse the impeachment of a judge who had issued a temporary ruling in a complex legal matter. The editorial described Musk’s actions as reckless, suggesting that his involvement in the political issue could hurt his reputation, especially when many of his own business ventures, such as Dogecoin-related actions, were facing legal challenges.
The Post suggested that Musk’s support for impeachment could be seen as politically motivated and criticized him for weighing in on an issue that required careful legal consideration.
While the editorial board made it clear that they supported tougher measures against criminal gang members, they cautioned that the legal process and the rights of individuals involved in deportation cases must be carefully considered. The issue, they argued, was not simply about removing gang members from the country but about ensuring that due process was followed.
The board warned that rushing to deport individuals without giving them the opportunity to contest their removal could set a dangerous precedent.
The Post editorial concluded by criticizing Musk’s support for the impeachment and reiterating that his comments were reckless. They emphasized that the case surrounding the deportation flights would ultimately be decided by the courts, and the focus should be on the legal arguments, not on political or public figures pushing for immediate action.
The editorial board’s opinion was clear: while immigration and criminal activity are serious issues, the legal system must be allowed to function without outside interference.
The conflict surrounding the deportation orders, the temporary suspension by Judge Boasberg, and the impeachment calls have highlighted the growing tension between legal processes, political agendas, and public figures weighing in on complex issues. As the legal battle continues, it remains to be seen how the courts will rule and what role public figures like Musk will play in influencing the national conversation on immigration and deportation.
